A taste of Rust
lwn.net
A taste of Rust
1–10 of 93 posts
Re: A taste of Rust
#2I'm a big fan of rust (hence my username), and would like to know if there have been any non-trivial benchmarks of Rust's compilation time, and the performance of compiled executable.
Last I checked Rust took about 40 minutes to compile itself on my laptop. Is it still the case? (I haven't touched Rust for a month or so.)
Also, is anyone using Rust in non-toy projects? (Except Mozilla's own servo.)
Re: A taste of Rust
#3I'm a big fan of rust (hence my username), and would like to know if there have been any non-trivial benchmarks of Rust's compilation time, and the performance of compiled executable. Last I checked Rust took about 40 minutes to compile itself on my laptop. Is it still the case? (I haven't touched Rust for a month or so.) Also, is anyone using Rust in non-toy projects? (Except Mozilla's own servo.)
Are these the sort of benchmarks (of compiled executables) you are looking for: http://pcwalton.github.io/blog/2013/04/18/performance-of-seq... ?
Re: A taste of Rust
#4The article doesn't specify what exactly, is permitted by an unsafe vs. safe function. The Rust reference indicates the additional operations permitted by unsafe functions are:
1. Dereferencing a raw pointer.
2. Casting a raw pointer to a safe pointer type.
3. Calling an unsafe function.
This isn't a value judgment. I just find it an interesting distinction.
Re: A taste of Rust
#5I'm a big fan of rust (hence my username), and would like to know if there have been any non-trivial benchmarks of Rust's compilation time, and the performance of compiled executable. Last I checked Rust took about 40 minutes to compile itself on my laptop. Is it still the case? (I haven't touched Rust for a month or so.) Also, is anyone using Rust in non-toy projects? (Except Mozilla's own servo.)
Are these the sort of benchmarks (of compiled executables) you are looking for: http://pcwalton.github.io/blog/2013/04/18/performance-of-seq... ?
Thanks for the link. They're good, but I'd really like to see the comparison of memory safe version and parallel version, compared to languages which compete on those fronts (as the comments on that post have already requested), as that would really be the selling point of Rust IMO.
Re: A taste of Rust
#6The article doesn't specify what exactly, is permitted by an unsafe vs. safe function. The Rust reference indicates the additional operations permitted by unsafe functions are: 1. Dereferencing a raw pointer. 2. Casting a raw pointer to a safe pointer type. 3. Calling an unsafe function. I was expecting something more along the lines of Safe Haskell ( http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.4.1/html/users_guide/safe-... )…
In D it usually means "no undefined behavior". For example, you can use the @safe annotation on functions.
Re: A taste of Rust
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are these the sort of benchmarks (of compiled executables) you are looking for: http://pcwalton.github.io/blog/2013/04/18/performance-of-seq... ?
Thanks for the link. They're good, but I'd really like to see the comparison of memory safe version and parallel version, compared to languages which compete on those fronts (as the comments on that post have already requested), as that would really be the selling point of Rust IMO.
It's still a little early to be benchmarking the scheduler as it is currently undergoing a large rewrite, I believe.
Re: A taste of Rust
#8I'm a big fan of rust (hence my username), and would like to know if there have been any non-trivial benchmarks of Rust's compilation time, and the performance of compiled executable. Last I checked Rust took about 40 minutes to compile itself on my laptop. Is it still the case? (I haven't touched Rust for a month or so.) Also, is anyone using Rust in non-toy projects? (Except Mozilla's own servo.)
> Also, is anyone using Rust in non-toy projects?
Since it's not production ready yet: no
Re: A taste of Rust
#9I'm a big fan of rust (hence my username), and would like to know if there have been any non-trivial benchmarks of Rust's compilation time, and the performance of compiled executable. Last I checked Rust took about 40 minutes to compile itself on my laptop. Is it still the case? (I haven't touched Rust for a month or so.) Also, is anyone using Rust in non-toy projects? (Except Mozilla's own servo.)
I would say benchmarking the compiler at this point is a little premature. As far as I know they have not even finalized the language yet.
Re: A taste of Rust
#10It might be childish but I just can't force myself to swallow the ugly curly braces and semicolons.
Some compromises had to be made, e.g. the lack of tailcalls is a regrettable but nonetheless well justified decision. But why didn't they include a standard indentation style in the language specification itself and get rid of the cruft? They have one for Servo anyway, which is the raison d'etre of the whole language, so it's bewildering to me why it isn't included as a part of the specification.
It just pains me to see a promising new language being burdened with an ugly looking syntax when the language itself is quite elegant.